Talk:Hold My Hand (Lady Gaga song)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Hold My Hand (Lady Gaga song) is currently a Songs good article nominee. Nominated by Sricsi (talk) at 07:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC) This article is ready to be reviewed in accordance with the good article criteria. Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review the article and decide if it should be listed as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and then save the page. See the instructions. |
 | Hold My Hand (Lady Gaga song) (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which was archived on 12 April 2026. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hold My Hand (Lady Gaga song) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
![WikiProject icon](#/media/File:WikiProject_Songs_7"_record_on_sheet_music.png){kind=small}
ShowBiz 411
Is ShowBiz 411 a reliable source? ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:56, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Upright
Please use standard thumb widths instead "upright" for images that are not tall. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:10, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Sricsi: I will be making this request in the Good article review if it gets picked up. I get that this seems to be a personal preference of yours, but I don't think "upright" should be used for images that are not tall. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:11, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Per MOS:IMGSIZE and WP:THUMBSIZE, the upright parameter is not restricted to tall images. It exists to adjust images that would otherwise appear too large. Disagreeing with its use is a matter of personal preference, not policy. If you have no other contributions to make to these articles, I suggest focusing your efforts elsewhere rather than policing image sizes and positions. Sricsi (talk) 14:18, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not "policing", I am just trying to make entries consistent and use the default image size. I guess we can let others weigh in, including the GA reviewer. Happy editing, ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:24, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Not making any constructive edits on Gaga's song articles, and only showing up to change image sizes and positions, is exactly what this amounts to. Sricsi (talk) 14:28, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Oh, stop, I've done plenty of good work on Gaga-related article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:30, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Glad to hear. Then maybe try doing that again, instead of just showing up to declare the size and position of images in articles you have on your Watchlist. Sricsi (talk) 14:34, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not just "showing up", I started this article... ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:35, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Creating a lot of articles and leaving them as stubs doesn't give you final say over images, especially when someone is trying to bring the article to an acceptable level. And yes, you are showing up. When was the last time you made any constructive edits to this article or Alice (Lady Gaga song)? You show up when the article is almost ready for its GA-nomination, to make your big contribution of changing the sizes and locations of images. Sricsi (talk) 14:41, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not going to argue over this. Happy editing ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:42, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Creating a lot of articles and leaving them as stubs doesn't give you final say over images, especially when someone is trying to bring the article to an acceptable level. And yes, you are showing up. When was the last time you made any constructive edits to this article or Alice (Lady Gaga song)? You show up when the article is almost ready for its GA-nomination, to make your big contribution of changing the sizes and locations of images. Sricsi (talk) 14:41, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not just "showing up", I started this article... ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:35, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- I've cropped the image, so hopefully use of upright is no longer needed. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:32, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Another Believer: If you'd actually like more editors to weigh in, it'd be better for you to take this to Talk:Lady Gaga. I don't think many people are watching this talk page, and the Gaga article also uses the upright parameter across its images, so the discussion would be directly relevant and more productive there — and certainly a better route than edging into an edit dispute. Sricsi (talk) 08:51, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
- Glad to hear. Then maybe try doing that again, instead of just showing up to declare the size and position of images in articles you have on your Watchlist. Sricsi (talk) 14:34, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Oh, stop, I've done plenty of good work on Gaga-related article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:30, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Not making any constructive edits on Gaga's song articles, and only showing up to change image sizes and positions, is exactly what this amounts to. Sricsi (talk) 14:28, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not "policing", I am just trying to make entries consistent and use the default image size. I guess we can let others weigh in, including the GA reviewer. Happy editing, ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:24, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Per MOS:IMGSIZE and WP:THUMBSIZE, the upright parameter is not restricted to tall images. It exists to adjust images that would otherwise appear too large. Disagreeing with its use is a matter of personal preference, not policy. If you have no other contributions to make to these articles, I suggest focusing your efforts elsewhere rather than policing image sizes and positions. Sricsi (talk) 14:18, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Peer review
Hold My Hand (Lady Gaga song)
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm considering nominating it for featured article status. Since this would be the first FAC I'm handling on my own, I wanted to seek input from experienced editors before moving forward. Any feedback on the prose, sourcing, structure, or areas that may need further development would be greatly appreciated, as I'm aiming to ensure the article meets the FA criteria as fully as possible.
Thanks, Sricsi (talk) 12:34, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
FAC PR sidebar
@Sricsi: I have added this PR to Template:FAC peer review sidebar. Please consider reviewing other articles listed there. Z1720 (talk) 02:31, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
NegativeMP1
Will check this out within the next few days. λ NegativeMP1 21:57, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- @NegativeMP1: Would you still like to review this? Let me know if you have any notes. :) Sricsi (talk) 09:08, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
- I took a look over the article, I honestly didn't see anything. I get this is underwhelming considering it took me a long time (my wiki-motivation has been extremely dead recently, sorry), but I honestly don't have much advice to give besides. I'd say nominate for GA first to see if a reviewer can give any comments to iron out before FAC, but it appears you're immediately going for FAC. In which case, let me know and I'll probably support once its there. That's the least I can give probably. Again, sorry I don't have any substantial comments to offer. λ NegativeMP1 03:04, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
Query
@Sricsi: This has been open for over a month without comment. Are you still interested in receiving comments, or should this be closed? Z1720 (talk) 03:34, 4 April 2026 (UTC)